Retaliation

The law states that the employer is required to negotiate a contract with the union “in a timely manner” following the winning vote. There is usually no need for further clarification, because employers usually are smart enough to know that negotiating a contract as quickly as possible is in the best interest of employers, employees, and the union. Everyone wants to get back to business as fast as possible, and getting the contract signed is the only way to do it. FFPIR, as far as anyone can tell, believes that if they put off contract negotiations as long as possible, then the whole situation will go away, like a bad dream.

The retaliations and thwarting efforts actually began before the vote. Prior to our petition, the office policy regarding quota standards, written or otherwise, had always been that a core staff member would have to average below quota at least two consecutive weeks before any director would event think about firing them. Not only would it be too easy for anyone to miss quota one single week, but the canvasser needs time to pull themselves up if their canvassing is, in fact, in a rut. In the weeks immediately prior to the vote, Jason Tipton, our new director for the summer, began firing people for missing quota for one week.  Tipton fired canvasser Adam Macy, who had been working there for two months, for missing quota one week. Adam was pro-union. After the vote, Jason fired Beatrice Chaidez, who canvassed for two months the previous fall, and had returned to canvass that summer. Beatrice was on staff two weeks this past summer. She made quota the first week, and missed it the second week. She was fired for missing quota the second week, with no regard to her previous work history in the LA door office. Beatrice was pro-union.

However, these firings were mainly to set a precedent so that it would be easier for Tipton to fire any union ringleaders who might miss quota one week. He got his chance in the first week of July. Tiffiney Petherbridge (the same year-round canvasser who had been ultimatumed for missing quota two days in April) missed quota that week. After taking the following weekend to reach a decision, Tipton fired her that following Monday morning, July 11, over the phone at 11:30am. Petherbridge went to the National Labor Relations Board office two hours later, and filed a charge. The charge was handed to Tipton an hour after that, at 2:30pm. Six hours later, at 8:30pm, Tipton gave Petherbridge her job back over her voicemail. Tipton claimed to have “rethought his decision, based on (her) record with FFPIR” (this despite having over two full days that weekend to make up his mind).

When Tipton fired Petherbridge, she had immediately requested that Tipton write a letter explaining why she was fired that week, but two other canvassers who missed quota that same week were not fired. The letter Petherbridge received two days later never referred directly to either of the other canvassers, but instead stated that she had been fired for missing quota two weeks- that week in July, and another week back in April. Despite any claims to the contrary, this marked the very first time any canvasser in FFPIR’s LA door office had ever been held accountable (and fired) for non-consecutive weeks of quota missed.

None of this, however, had anything to do with the second time Tipton fired Petherbridge, three weeks later. Petherbridge had received an HRC mail-in contribution in the middle of June. Knowing that Tipton was going to start up the HRC campaign in July, Petherbridge kept the check in her mailbox in the office for what she thought would be two or three weeks. Instead, five weeks had elapsed before Tipton started up the HRC campaign, during which time Petherbridge’s mailbox had been usurped for director use, and Petherbridge had been told to take home what was in there, including her HRC mail-in. Despite assurances by Tipton that she would be allowed to canvass on the HRC campaign, Petherbridge was not allowed to switch over from Environment California to HRC, because, Tipton said, her average was too low. Instead of cashing out with the check herself, Petherbridge gave it to fellow canvasser Christian Miller, who cashed out with it at the beginning of the second week on HRC. By now, the check was almost two months old- two weeks in the mail, two or three weeks in Petherbridge’s mailbox, another two or three weeks in Petherbridge’s possession until Tipton started HRC, and a week before Miller cashed out with it. Tipton noticed the date on the check, and asked Miller why he was cashing out with a check that was dated at the end of May. Miller, thinking he had nothing to cover up, told Tipton it was a mail-in addressed to Petherbridge. When asked, Petherbridge said the same thing. Miller and Petherbridge were both disciplined, and essentially told not to do this again.

That was Wednesday, July 27. After the following weekend, Tipton fired Petherbridge Tuesday, August 2. In a memo given to Petherbridge, he gave three reasons for her termination- we are not allowed to share contributions with other canvassers, we are not allowed to cash out with old checks, and we are not allowed to receive mail-ins on HRC. The last reason is completely untrue. Several canvassers in the LA door office have received HRC mail-ins, all of us have been encouraged to ask for mail-ins on all campaigns, and no one has ever been told not to accept mail-ins on HRC. The second reason is baseless- why would such a rule exist? How often does a canvasser cash out with a check that is two months old? If taking the check to the bank is a problem, then why did Tipton put the contribution into office net? The only reason of the three that might have held any water is the first one. But because Miller made quota that week even after the contribution was taken away, HRC still got their $50, and the FFPIR canvasser still got their 35% commission. This was not affected.  Furthermore, this only became a rule after Tipton arrived to run the LA office.

Needless to say, the summer was not a huge success. The directors had no respect whatsoever for the core staff, which made it hard for the summer staff to have any respect for the directors. One result of this (besides falling almost 50% short of our goal) was that the office had about seven people on staff by the middle of August. By the third week of September, the LA door office had four people on staff, all of whom, openly pro-union, had been among the original petitioners in April. By this time, the office had been on a hiring freeze since early September. The reason that the canvassers were given for the hiring freeze is that the directors are “waiting until the tension in the office is gone.” FFPIR knows that this tension will exist as long as Tipton and these four canvassers are working in the same office, and it is safe to assume they don’t have any plans to fire Tipton any time soon. Given FFPIR’s history of closing at least one office to avoid a unionization, we have reason to think they might be pursuing that option once again.  

Tipton’s unilateral changes in office policy haven’t been corrected either. Sometime in August, he quietly posted a “clarification” of office policy on the wall. This policy states that a canvasser who misses quota any three non-consecutive weeks will be terminated. In other words, a canvasser can work in this office for three years, and if he or she misses quota once a year, they will be fired after the third year of missing quota one week. This policy is an excellent way to make sure that virtually no one remains on staff for anything resembling long-term, or at least until we negotiate a contract.